Europe 1940 shows up on Wizards site…with screenshot

@LHoffman:

@cminke:

take a look at the fmg pieces project in axis and allies varient.

I looked. (on the FMG website)

Is Italy the only available one for purchase at this time then? It says out of stock, unfortunately. And is the $60.00 for just one nation (Italy) or is it for the entire set of Italy, Germany, Japan, USSR, USA and Britain?

Italy is the first nation they are working on since so many people want them for AAAE anyway.  All the sculpts and such are not yet complete.  That’s why cminke referred you to the thread discussion the process of production they are going through as input from this forum community is being taken into account in the process.

@SAS:

Italy is the first nation they are working on since so many people want them for AAAE anyway.  All the sculpts and such are not yet complete.  That’s why cminke referred you to the thread discussion the process of production they are going through as input from this forum community is being taken into account in the process.

Oh, thanks. Cool, I will check that out then and maybe chirp in. I actually went to the thread first, but it is rather long at this stage. I will have some catching up to do.

So I’m counting 25 or 26 neutral territories, counting Switzerland (which most likely will be impassable like the Himalayas are in the Pacific map and as Sahara appears to be) Ireland (which will probably be worthless to invade regardless except in some crazy Sea Lion scheme), and the possible second Turkish territory adjacent to Caucasus (if it is a second territory, it doesn’t spawn infantry as there is no black symbol that I can see, but the non-spawning Mongolian territories don’t have that symbol), and not counting the Russian marshlands or the Sahara; 14 of those have a black symbol meaning they spawn infantry while a bunch of those in South America appear not to.  Finland appears to be neutral, though it may be German… :?  The apparent empty second Turkish territory would mean that Russia could potentially blitz right up to the main Turkish territory and close of the Dardanelles rather easily.

Also, I don’t see any distinctive features marking them as pro-Axis or pro-Allies or true neutrals. :|  I’m guessing there’ll be a list in the rulebook?  I think Brazil is greenish simply because of the coloring for the Amazon rainforest(?).  It appears to me that the neutral territories simply have a whitish/lighter shade to the “natural” color of the landscape (as all the other territories have a shading reflecting the controlling power, but still vary according to landscape).

@SAS:

So I’m counting 25 or 26 neutral territories, counting Switzerland (which most likely will be impassable like the Himalayas are in the Pacific map and as Sahara appears to be) Ireland (which will probably be worthless to invade regardless except in some crazy Sea Lion scheme), and the possible second Turkish territory adjacent to Caucasus (if it is a second territory, it doesn’t spawn infantry as there is no black symbol that I can see, but the non-spawning Mongolian territories don’t have that symbol), and not counting the Russian marshlands or the Sahara; 14 of those have a black symbol meaning they spawn infantry while a bunch of those in South America appear not to.  Finland appears to be neutral, though it may be German… :?  The apparent empty second Turkish territory would mean that Russia could potentially blitz right up to the main Turkish territory and close of the Dardanelles rather easily.

Did you count Brazil as a neutral?

Also, I don’t see any distinctive features marking them as pro-Axis or pro-Allies or true neutrals. :|  I’m guessing there’ll be a list in the rulebook?  I think Brazil is greenish simply because of the coloring for the Amazon rainforest(?).  It appears to me that the neutral territories simply have a whitish/lighter shade to the “natural” color of the landscape (as all the other territories have a shading reflecting the controlling power, but still vary according to landscape).

@SAS:

So I’m counting 25 or 26 neutral territories, counting Switzerland (which most likely will be impassable like the Himalayas are in the Pacific map and as Sahara appears to be) Ireland (which will probably be worthless to invade regardless except in some crazy Sea Lion scheme), and the possible second Turkish territory adjacent to Caucasus (if it is a second territory, it doesn’t spawn infantry as there is no black symbol that I can see, but the non-spawning Mongolian territories don’t have that symbol), and not counting the Russian marshlands or the Sahara; 14 of those have a black symbol meaning they spawn infantry while a bunch of those in South America appear not to.  Finland appears to be neutral, though it may be German… :?  The apparent empty second Turkish territory would mean that Russia could potentially blitz right up to the main Turkish territory and close of the Dardanelles rather easily.

Also, I don’t see any distinctive features marking them as pro-Axis or pro-Allies or true neutrals. :|  I’m guessing there’ll be a list in the rulebook?  I think Brazil is greenish simply because of the coloring for the Amazon rainforest(?).  It appears to me that the neutral territories simply have a whitish/lighter shade to the “natural” color of the landscape (as all the other territories have a shading reflecting the controlling power, but still vary according to landscape).

I think 15 spawn inf, assuming Spain does(an Italian tank is covering Spain)

So, are we able to tell yet if the Middle Eastern countries have IPC value. Would they be considered pro-British (Allies). I would think that they would have to be of some worth… having BLACK GOLD written all over them.

It appears from the picture that Russia has taken them under their control, by virtue of the Soviet roundels on the territories. I would assume they have value to both sides. Might they be like the Dutch territories in Pacific, where they are pro-Allies, but open for the taking by either side for IPCs?

@LHoffman:

So, are we able to tell yet if the Middle Eastern countries have IPC value. Would they be considered pro-British (Allies). I would think that they would have to be of some worth… having BLACK GOLD written all over them.

Larry threw out a number about the total value of the Middle East, but I can’t remember it…

@LHoffman:

So, are we able to tell yet if the Middle Eastern countries have IPC value. Would they be considered pro-British (Allies). I would think that they would have to be of some worth… having BLACK GOLD written all over them.

It appears from the picture that Russia has taken them under their control, by virtue of the Soviet roundels on the territories. I would assume they have value to both sides. Might they be like the Dutch territories in Pacific, where they are pro-Allies, but open for the taking by either side for IPCs?

Iran is pro-allies; iraq is pro-axis. turkey, saudi, and afghanistan are probably true neutrals

I count over 20 Soviet territories. This is more than the entire Soviet Union in AA50-41. Add that to the 9 on the Pacific board and this game will have a massive Eastern front

@McMan:

@LHoffman:

So, are we able to tell yet if the Middle Eastern countries have IPC value. Would they be considered pro-British (Allies). I would think that they would have to be of some worth… having BLACK GOLD written all over them.

Larry threw out a number about the total value of the Middle East, but I can’t remember it…

12

@calvinhobbesliker:

I count over 20 Soviet territories. This is more than the entire Soviet Union in AA50-41. Add that to the 9 on the Pacific board and this game will have a massive Eastern front

SWEET! I love to hear that!

I think you can reach Brazil from New Zealand(if you control the NB) and Argentina from Queensland(again, if you control the NB).

How long has this been on line. Does anybody see Ipc values on neutrals.

@calvinhobbesliker:

@SAS:

So I’m counting 25 or 26 neutral territories, counting Switzerland (which most likely will be impassable like the Himalayas are in the Pacific map and as Sahara appears to be) Ireland (which will probably be worthless to invade regardless except in some crazy Sea Lion scheme), and the possible second Turkish territory adjacent to Caucasus (if it is a second territory, it doesn’t spawn infantry as there is no black symbol that I can see, but the non-spawning Mongolian territories don’t have that symbol), and not counting the Russian marshlands or the Sahara; 14 of those have a black symbol meaning they spawn infantry while a bunch of those in South America appear not to.  Finland appears to be neutral, though it may be German… :?  The apparent empty second Turkish territory would mean that Russia could potentially blitz right up to the main Turkish territory and close of the Dardanelles rather easily.

Also, I don’t see any distinctive features marking them as pro-Axis or pro-Allies or true neutrals. :|  I’m guessing there’ll be a list in the rulebook?  I think Brazil is greenish simply because of the coloring for the Amazon rainforest(?).  It appears to me that the neutral territories simply have a whitish/lighter shade to the “natural” color of the landscape (as all the other territories have a shading reflecting the controlling power, but still vary according to landscape).

I think 15 spawn inf, assuming Spain does(an Italian tank is covering Spain)

I did count Brazil, which is why I mentioned it in the second paragraph (it has a black infantry spawn symbol), and I did count Spain as well for both total number of neutrals and those that spawn infantry (I also assume the Italian tank is covering the black infantry symbol).

@cminke:

I think Brazil is greenish simply because of the coloring for the Amazon rainforest(?).

i think it is because of they are pro allied(usa, thus the green)

hey calvinhobbesliker congrats on the 1000th post! :wink:

Except that all of the South American neutrals are greenish, and (as is made clear in previous A&A games) not all of them were pro-Allies.  That’s what brought up the question for me about how we are to know which of the neutrals are pro-Axis or pro-Allies or neither.

@cminke:

I think Brazil is greenish simply because of the coloring for the Amazon rainforest(?).

i think it is because of they are pro allied(usa, thus the green)

hey calvinhobbesliker congrats on the 1000th post! :wink:

Thanks.

@calvinhobbesliker:

I count over 20 Soviet territories. This is more than the entire Soviet Union in AA50-41. Add that to the 9 on the Pacific board and this game will have a massive Eastern front

Interesting.  Let’s assume 30 territories for the USSR, then, and let’s further assume that each one has a minimum value of 1 (given that every territory in Siberia has a 1 IPC value, I don’t expect any of the Europe board USSR territories to have 0 value).  Further, let’s assume that the USSR has a major IC in Russia, major IC in Caucasus (Stalingrad) and minor IC in Karelia, then those territories have minimum values of 3, 3, and 2, respectively.  With all of those assumptions, the minimum USSR income is 35 IPCs.  Realistically, I would expect those three territories to be higher, as well as to have a few other 2 value territories.  Therefore, I expect that USSR’s starting income is a healthy 40.  Just think what that means for the other powers.

@SAS:

@cminke:

I think Brazil is greenish simply because of the coloring for the Amazon rainforest(?).

i think it is because of they are pro allied(usa, thus the green)

hey calvinhobbesliker congrats on the 1000th post! :wink:

Except that all of the South American neutrals are greenish, and (as is made clear in previous A&A games) not all of them were pro-Allies.  That’s what brought up the question for me about how we are to know which of the neutrals are pro-Axis or pro-Allies or neither.

I think there are 17:

Argebtina, Brazil, Venezuela, Angola, Mozambique, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Western Iran, Eastern Iran, Afghanistan, Turkey, Greece, Yugoslavia, Spain, Portugal, Sweden, Switzerland. Maybe Ireland, but I can’t see it.

Is Northern Ireland a separate territory? if no, does it mean that ireland can be invaded from the British mainland?

@purplebaron:

@calvinhobbesliker:

I count over 20 Soviet territories. This is more than the entire Soviet Union in AA50-41. Add that to the 9 on the Pacific board and this game will have a massive Eastern front

Interesting.  Let’s assume 30 territories for the USSR, then, and let’s further assume that each one has a minimum value of 1 (given that every territory in Siberia has a 1 IPC value, I don’t expect any of the Europe board USSR territories to have 0 value).  Further, let’s assume that the USSR has a major IC in Russia, major IC in Caucasus (Stalingrad) and minor IC in Karelia, then those territories have minimum values of 3, 3, and 2, respectively.  With all of those assumptions, the minimum USSR income is 35 IPCs.  Realistically, I would expect those three territories to be higher, as well as to have a few other 2 value territories.  Therefore, I expect that USSR’s starting income is a healthy 40.  Just think what that means for the other powers.

Caucusus is probably 3 (it looks like that on the map), but Russia is probably 6 or 8. So, it may be up to 45, and even higher with NO’s. Larry said it gets 6 ipc’s for every German tt it has, so if Russia captures 2 2 ipc german tt, it’s income will be over 60! Add to that the Russian NO for Archangel and no allied units, and you get 65. Germany can’t be defensive and wait for Japan; it must kill Russia by itself, with help from italy.

@cminke:

I think Brazil is greenish simply because of the coloring for the Amazon rainforest(?).

i think it is because of they are pro allied(usa, thus the green)

hey calvinhobbesliker congrats on the 1000th post! :wink:

Besides, the stated neutral rules from LH have been that whichever power invades and takes over the neutral territory gets the IPCs; that wouldn’t allow for neutrals to be aligned to a specific power like the USA, so why should it be green for that reason?  I think it’s just green because of the vegetation.  Being green for the US doesn’t fit with the stated rules.

@calvinhobbesliker:

@SAS:

@cminke:

I think Brazil is greenish simply because of the coloring for the Amazon rainforest(?).

i think it is because of they are pro allied(usa, thus the green)

hey calvinhobbesliker congrats on the 1000th post! :wink:

Except that all of the South American neutrals are greenish, and (as is made clear in previous A&A games) not all of them were pro-Allies.  That’s what brought up the question for me about how we are to know which of the neutrals are pro-Axis or pro-Allies or neither.

I think there are 17:

Argebtina, Brazil, Venezuela, Angola, Mozambique, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Western Iran, Eastern Iran, Afghanistan, Turkey, Greece, Yugoslavia, Spain, Portugal, Sweden, Switzerland. Maybe Ireland, but I can’t see it.

Is Northern Ireland a separate territory? if no, does it mean that ireland can be invaded from the British mainland?

17 total neutral territories or 17 that spawn infantry?  Ireland/Eire is still colored whitish in the photo, though I’m of the opinion that it will either be impassable as Switzerland (which you included in your list of 17) is, or it will just be a true neutral with 0 IPC value, which would make it relatively worthless to invade regardless.  Previously in AE and AA42 Northern Ireland was shaded tannish/yellowish, marking it part of the UK, but it was (and I think, still will be) like Formosa where because it is still in the same sea zone as the other more important territory, it doesn’t serve much strategic value.  Krieg actually ruled previously that Northern Ireland counts in AE as a separate territory from Great Britain proper, but no one ever treats it that way or uses it because there isn’t much point.

Like I said previously, I can only see it being worthwhile to invade if Germany/Italy go Sea Lion, knock out the UK/US/French navy, but can’t immediately crack Great Britain proper, and then maybe it would somehow be worthwhile to land in Eire to put extra units there.  Though even with the modified map, I don’t (at least currently) see why you couldn’t just mass your troops in France anyway and just bring them across the channel as usual.  Perhaps the US might use it to help crack an Axis defense of Great Britain after a Sea Lion takeover, but again, that’s still not immediately helpful… :|

@calvinhobbesliker:

@purplebaron:

@calvinhobbesliker:

I count over 20 Soviet territories. This is more than the entire Soviet Union in AA50-41. Add that to the 9 on the Pacific board and this game will have a massive Eastern front

Interesting.  Let’s assume 30 territories for the USSR, then, and let’s further assume that each one has a minimum value of 1 (given that every territory in Siberia has a 1 IPC value, I don’t expect any of the Europe board USSR territories to have 0 value).  Further, let’s assume that the USSR has a major IC in Russia, major IC in Caucasus (Stalingrad) and minor IC in Karelia, then those territories have minimum values of 3, 3, and 2, respectively.  With all of those assumptions, the minimum USSR income is 35 IPCs.  Realistically, I would expect those three territories to be higher, as well as to have a few other 2 value territories.  Therefore, I expect that USSR’s starting income is a healthy 40.  Just think what that means for the other powers.

Caucusus is probably 3 (it looks like that on the map), but Russia is probably 6 or 8. So, it may be up to 45, and even higher with NO’s. Larry said it gets 6 ipc’s for every German tt it has, so if Russia captures 2 2 ipc german tt, it’s income will be over 60! Add to that the Russian NO for Archangel and no allied units, and you get 65. Germany can’t be defensive and wait for Japan; it must kill Russia by itself, with help from italy.

He said you’d get 6ipcs for every German territory you control if you own all Russian territories.